Methods and systems for managing community information

ABSTRACT

The present disclosure describes a system and method for managing and disseminating community information in a cloud. The computer-implemented method and system for comparing service performance comprises receiving, by a server over a communication network from a computer of each of a plurality of client companies, metadata of a plurality of transactions in enterprise resource planning systems being operated by the plurality of client companies, and presenting, by the server over the communication network to a computer of a selected client company of the plurality of client companies, comparative performance information for display on a graphical user interface of the selected client company based on metadata of transactions in enterprise resource planning systems of other client companies that are substantially similar to the enterprise resource planning system of the selected client company.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser.No. 61/885,884, filed Oct. 2, 2013, entitled “Methods and Systems forManaging Community Information,” which is incorporated by reference inits entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates generally to managing and disseminating communityinformation in a cloud.

BACKGROUND

Some companies run, manage, and service their own enterprise systems,such as those from Oracle® or Infor Lawson® systems. Other companiesoutsource the services to a third party, who will host the hardware andsoftware, and will manage these enterprise systems for the companies. Ineither configuration, however, the companies are not able to benefitfrom the experiences of other companies to benchmark their use of theenterprise systems.

SUMMARY

The present disclosure describes a system and method for managing anddisseminating community information in a cloud. In an exemplary methodfor utilizing the community information, a client company performstransactions and/or software operations (e.g., actions) in an enterprisesystem hosted by a host entity, such as in a cloud environment. The hostentity stores metadata (e.g., response time, delay time, processingtime, usage) about the transactions in a database for the clientcompany's actions and the actions of other client companies. The hostentity uses the stored metadata to present information to the clientcompany regarding the performance of the client company in comparison toone or more other client companies having metadata stored in thedatabase. The host entity may present a webpage to the client companythat shows the client company's performance based on the particularmetadata along with metadata for one or more other client company'susing the same or similar applications or performing the same or similartransactions.

In one embodiment, a computer-implemented method comprises receiving, bya server over a communication network from a computer of each of aplurality of client companies, a first transmission comprising metadataof a plurality of software operations in enterprise resource planningsystems being operated by the plurality of client companies, whereineach of the software operations is linked to a specific metadatapermitting the server to group data relating to each software operationto a specific category; and presenting, by the server over thecommunication network to a computer of a selected client company of theplurality of client companies, a second transmission comprisingcomparative performance information regarding a plurality of thesoftware operations for display of performance of the plurality of thesoftware operations based on metadata of the software operations inenterprise resource planning systems of other client companies that aresubstantially similar to the enterprise resource planning system of theselected client company.

In another embodiment, a system comprises a communication serverconfigured to receive a transmission comprising performance data ofsoftware operations performed by an enterprise resource planning systemserver of each client company and transmit comparative information to aclient company communication server for display on a client companycomputer, wherein the comparative information represents performancedata of software operations of substantially similar enterprise resourceplanning systems compared to performance data of software operations ofthe client company's enterprise resource planning system; and adashboard server configured to compare performance data of softwareoperations performed by an enterprise resource planning system server ofeach client company and present the compared performance data to thecommunication server for transmission to a client company.

In yet another embodiment, a computer-implemented method comprisesreceiving, by a server, a first transmission comprising a first set ofmetadata from a first client company for software operations in a firstenterprise system, wherein each of the software operations is linked toa specific metadata permitting the server to group data relating to eachsoftware operation to a specific category; receiving, by the server, asecond transmission comprising a second set of metadata from a secondclient company for software operations in a second enterprise system,wherein each of the software operations is linked to a specific metadatapermitting the server to group data relating to each software operationto a specific category; storing, by the server, the first set ofmetadata and the second set of metadata in a database; comparing, by theserver, the first set of metadata to the second set of metadata; andsending, by the server, a third transmission of the comparison ofperformance of the software operations for presentation on a display ofa computing device of the first client company.

Additional features and advantages of an embodiment will be set forth inthe description which follows, and in part will be apparent from thedescription. The objectives and other advantages of the invention willbe realized and attained by the structure particularly pointed out inthe exemplary embodiments in the written description and claims hereofas well as the appended drawings.

It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description andthe following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory and areintended to provide further explanation of the invention as claimed.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The methods, systems and/or programming described herein are furtherdescribed in terms of exemplary embodiments. These exemplary embodimentsare described in detail with reference to the drawings. Theseembodiments are non-limiting exemplary embodiments, in which likereference numerals represent similar structures throughout the severalviews of the drawings, and wherein:

FIG. 1 shows a system architecture according to an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 2 shows a method according to an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 3 shows a graphical user interface showing a dashboard according toan exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 4 shows a graphical user interface showing a heat map according toan exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 5 shows a graphical user interface for comparing communityinformation according to an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 6 shows a graphical user interface for displaying performance overtime according to an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 7 shows a graphical user interface displaying open requestsaccording to an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 8 shows a graphical user interface for displaying outages accordingto an exemplary embodiment.

FIG. 9 shows a graphical user interface displaying one or more productlines for a client company according to an exemplary embodiment.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Various embodiments and aspects of the invention will be described withreference to details discussed below, and the accompanying drawings willillustrate the various embodiments. The following description anddrawings are illustrative of the invention and are not to be construedas limiting the invention. Numerous specific details are described toprovide a thorough understanding of various embodiments of the presentinvention. However, in certain instances, well-known or conventionaldetails are not described in order to provide a concise discussion ofembodiments of the present invention.

The systems and methods described herein are able to present informationto the client company from the host entity based upon the community ofclient companies hosted by the host entity. The client company can usethe presented information to compare its performance against similarclient companies.

Referring to FIG. 1, a system architecture 10 for managing anddisseminating community information in a cloud is shown according to anexemplary embodiment. A host entity 12 can host an enterprise system 14for various client companies, collectively referred to as a community.The host entity 12 can host the enterprise system 14 on a cloudplatform. The host entity 12 may provide service level agreements (SLAs)that the client company 22, 30 cannot obtain themselves. The host entity12 can provide real-time information on a dashboard regarding theoperation of the enterprise system 14, including a number of tickets,response time, who is logging on, etc. The client company 22, 30 may usethe enterprise system 14 to perform a plurality of transactions and/orsoftware operations, where each transaction and/or software operation isperformed by a client company 22, 30 representative using hardwareand/or software hosted by the host entity 12. Each transaction and/orsoftware operation (e.g., adding an invoice, submitting a time record,submitting a batch job) is not intended to be limited to a financialtransaction and/or software operation, but rather a measurable ordiscrete task, project, and/or action in the enterprise system 14.Because the host entity 12 has so much data from different clientcompanies 22, 30 using the same or similar enterprise systems, the hostentity 12 can also provide information to the client company 22, 30about the performance of the client company's enterprise system ascompared to other client companies. For example, the host entity 12 mayprovide feedback to the client company that an accounts payable clerkprocesses an invoice for 2.1 seconds, but other client companies in thecommunity may be performing the same task at a faster rate. In anotherexample, a clerk may have a 75% success rate in processing an invoice,but clerks at other client companies in the community have an 85%success rate. The client company 22, 30 may then adjust their processesor their software based upon the comparison feedback provided by thehost entity 12.

A host entity 12 hosts an enterprise system 10 for a plurality of clientcompanies 22, 30. The enterprise system is shown as a single server, butit is intended that the enterprise system 14 may include one or moreservers, databases, and/or cloud environments used to host the system onbehalf of the client company 22, 30.

The host entity 12 may have a dashboard server 18 communicativelycoupled to the enterprise system for harvesting data and presenting thedata to a communication server for display to a client company 22, 30.Although one server is shown for the dashboard server 18, it is intendedthat the functionality may be performed by one or more servers anddatabases. The dashboard server 18 may include a plurality of monitoringtools or applications to assist in managing a client company'sinformation. The dashboard server 18 may also be communicatively coupledto a database 20. The database 20 can store records having metadatagathered by the dashboard server 18.

The database 20 stores metadata, which is information about a clientcompany's transactions and/or software operations, but does not includedata about the underlying transaction and/or software operation. Forexample, a client company in the healthcare industry, such as ahospital, may order a suture tray with all of the tools and items neededto provide stitches to a patient. The database 20 may store informationabout how many suture trays are ordered for the sake of comparing theordering trends with other hospitals. But the database 20 may not storeinformation about a particular patient that needed stitches or thereason the stitches were applied. In the exemplary embodiment, thedatabase 20 may not store any sensitive information or information whichis not allowed to be shared or stored.

The host entity 12 also has a communication server 16 (e.g., a webserver) to transmit data to and from the client companies. The hostentity's communication server 16 may present a webpage to acommunication server 26, 34 (e.g., web server) of the client company 22,30. The host entity's communication server 16 may populate the webpagewith data obtained from a communicatively coupled dashboard server 18,and the host entity's communication server 16 may transmit the webpagefor display at the client company 22, 30.

Although two client companies 22, 30 are shown, it is intended that thehost entity 12 may host a community of any number of client companies22, 30. Also, although the exemplary embodiment recites the use of anenterprise system 14, it is intended that any platform or software thatis consistent with the scope of this disclosure may be used. In thisexemplary embodiment, each client company 22, 30 may have an enterpriseresource planning (ERP) server 28, 36. Although one ERP server 28, 36 isshown for each client company 22, 30, it is intended that thefunctionality may be performed by one or more servers and databases. TheERP server 28, 36 may be communicatively coupled to the communicationserver 26, 34 of the client company 22, 30 to transmit data to and fromthe communication server 26, 34 of the host entity 12, which is coupledto the host entity's enterprise system 14. These servers may communicateover a network, such as the internet.

The client company 22, 30 has a workstation 24, 32 and/or othercomputing device (e.g., desktop computer, laptop computer, tabletcomputer, mobile device, cellular phone, smartphone, personal dataassistant) that can communicate through the client company'scommunication server 26, 34 with the host entity 12. The host entity 12can generate a webpage using the dashboard server 18 and data from thedatabase 20 to provide the community information to the workstation 24,32 at the client entity. This information is generated by the hostentity 12 and configured for display on a graphical user interface(e.g., web browser) of the workstation 24, 32 of the client company 22,30, as described below with respect to FIGS. 3 to 9.

In an alternative embodiment, the host entity 12 can obtain informationfrom a client company 22, 30 to provide insight. The system can beconfigured so that the ERP server 28, 36 can extract information andprovide it to the dashboard server 18 so that the host entity 12 canprovide information about trends, efficiencies, and performance.

By gathering transactional metadata from a community of enterprisesystem 14 client companies 22, 30, the system can provide comparativeanalysis of system and user efficiency. Furthermore, by gatheringmetadata about the community's systems themselves (e.g., versions,patches), it is possible to provide additional comparative analysis forsystem and user performance across different versions. Further, byadding additional metadata about system changes and system events (i.e.,monitors), additional comparative analysis can be provided.

Examples of how a host entity 12 can use metadata to compare the clientcompany 22, 30 with others in the community include, but are not limitedto, an ability to: (1) analyze on-line transactional usage forpatterns/comparisons by system/transaction/function; (2) analyze batchsystem usage for patterns/comparisons by system/transaction/function;(3) analyze system performance metrics for patterns/comparisons bysystem/transaction/function; (4) analyze system level(version/upgrade/cyclical/patch) for patterns/comparisons bysystem/transaction/function; (5) analyze ad-hoc query usage/efficiency(and impact on overall system performance); (6) analyze user logins forpatterns/comparisons by system/transaction/function; (7) analyze usersession duration/habits for patterns/comparisons bysystem/transaction/function; (8) analyze user efficiencies forpatterns/comparisons by system/transaction/function; (9) identifyanomalous user behavior (i.e., users logging in from home @ 2:30 am);and (10) identify anomalous transaction and/or software operationbehavior (i.e., daemon process that updates Accounts Payable Vendorterms before scheduled check runs and changes back after check run).

In one embodiment, an internal control system can harvest metadata aboutthe actual system itself, including all source code, objects, screens,configurations, database, etc. This system would allow for: (1) changecontrol analysis; (2) configuration comparisons with community; (3) allperformance metrics above sliced by any changes to system; and (4)system delta(s) from delivered “gold code.”

Referring to FIG. 2, a method diagram 40 for managing and disseminatingcommunity information in a cloud is shown according to an exemplaryembodiment.

In step 42, a server may receive over a communication network from acomputer of each of a plurality of client companies, transmittance ofmetadata of a plurality of transactions and/or software operations inenterprise resource planning systems being operated by the plurality ofclient companies. Each of the software operations may be linked to aspecific metadata permitting the server to group data relating to eachsoftware operation to a specific category. In some implementations, themetadata does not include personal identifying information. In someimplementations, receiving metadata comprises receiving a transmissionof metadata generated by an enterprise resource planning system serverof each client company. Non-limiting examples of the types of metadatain the plurality of transactions and/or software operations are furtherdescribed in FIGS. 3-9 below.

In step 44, the server may present over the communication network to acomputer of a selected client company of the plurality of clientcompanies, transmittance of comparative performance informationregarding a plurality of the software operations and/or transactions fordisplay of performance of the plurality of the software operations basedon metadata of transactions and/or software operations in enterpriseresource planning systems of other client companies that aresubstantially similar to the enterprise resource planning system of theselected client company.

The enterprise resource planning system may implement a businessmanagement software that a company may use to collect, store, manage andinterpret data from many business activities. Some of these activitiesmay include: product planning, cost and development, manufacturing orservice delivery, marketing and sales, inventory management, shippingand/or payment. The system may provide an integrated view of corebusiness processes, often in real-time, using common databasesmaintained by the database management system. The enterprise resourceplanning system may track business resources such as cash, rawmaterials, production capacity. In some implementations, the system maytrack the status of business commitments including one or more of:orders, purchase orders, and/or payroll. The applications which make upthe system may share data across the various departments (manufacturing,purchasing, sales, accounting, etc.) that provide the data. The systemmay facilitate information flow between all business functions, andmanages connections to outside stakeholders.

In some implementations, the performance information may comprise asuccess rate. The success rate may be determined based on any businessand/or software implementation in the one or more companies. In otherimplementations, the performance information may comprise a processingtime. Processing time may be determined based on any business and/orsoftware implementation in one or more companies.

In some implementations, presenting comparative performance informationfurther comprises comparing metadata of transactions and/or softwareoperations of different versions of the same enterprise resourceplanning system. In some implementations, presenting comparativeperformance information is performed substantially in real-time.Real-time may be the actual time during which the process and/or eventis occurring. Non-limiting examples of types of presenting comparativeperformance information are further described in FIGS. 3-9 below.

Referring to FIG. 3, a graphical user interface 50 showing a dashboardaccording to an exemplary embodiment. Each of the panels 52 can berearranged to a different position on the graphical user interface, andthe panels 52 can be added or removed as desired. By activating a buttonin the upper left corner, the user can expose additional options orpanels. Each panel can present information about an aspect of theenterprise system to the client company. For example, one panel isentitled “Transactions” and includes community information. TheTransactions panel 54 shows the slowest running transactions and/orsoftware operations in the last three days, which may be thetransactions and/or software operations that require the most attention.Some enterprise systems may be running thousands of applications at atime, so it is useful to see which types of transactions and/or softwareoperations take the most amount of time to complete.

Referring to FIG. 4, a graphical user interface 60 showing a heat map ofusage is shown for the enterprise system. This heat map may be generatedby clicking on a link for “Transaction Analysis” in a panel on adashboard. The heat map shows usage by transaction and/or softwareoperation count and response time. The left axis 62 represents a time ofday, the top axis 64 represents a time of month, the right axisrepresents total hours, and the bottom axis represents total days. Thenumber on the heat map represents a number of transactions and/orsoftware operations. In this exemplary embodiment, the filter is HR butnot HR11.1, referring to an Infor Lawson® human resources application.Although the exemplary embodiments may recite the use of an Oracle orInfor Lawson enterprise system, it is intended that any enterprisesystem may be used with the methods and systems described herein. Asshown in this exemplary heat map, the 16th, 17th, and 30th days of themonth are the most busy, and those days happen to coincide with payrolltime. It may be useful for the client company to see how other similarbusinesses are performing during these periods, e.g., whether the numberof transactions and/or software operations has been spread out or movedto a different part of the month.

Referring to FIG. 5, a graphical user interface 70 for comparingcommunity information is shown according to an exemplary embodiment.This graphical user interface may be presented to the user uponselecting the “Transactions” panel, as shown in FIG. 3. As shown in thefirst row 72, the name AP230 refers to a particular application. Eachrow listed under “Community Size” includes a version number and patchlevel, along with a corresponding volume. In some instances, differentdepartments within a client company may use different versions or patchlevels of the same application. In this example, the client company canobserve that it is running the application 24.29 times slower thanothers using the same version. In another example, for GL291, there arefive different versions running in the community, and version 174 isfaster than version 153. This client company is running the applicationwith an average response time of 4.03 seconds, which is slower than theslowest version of the application. So the client company may haveinefficiencies in this version and may consider upgrading to a differentversion. This community comparison can provide data that allows theclient company to evaluate their efficiencies and delays.

Referring to FIG. 6, a graphical user interface 80 for displayingperformance over time is shown according to an exemplary embodiment. Thechart shows response time of transactions and/or software operations,drills, and queries over time. If a modification or change was made tothe system, this chart can show how the modification or change affectedperformance. A filter (e.g., limiting to a certain application) can beused to see which jobs were running “Drills” can represent a feature ofan application where a user drills down into the data to see moreinformation about the a transaction and/or software operation. “Queries”can represent a number of queries by users, some of whom may writeimproper queries that overwhelm the system. In this example, point “A”represents a time when the client company requested to recycle LawsonBusiness Intelligence (LBI). Point A is shown on the chart to see howperformance was affected.

Referring to FIG. 7, a graphical user interface 90 displaying openrequests is shown according to an exemplary embodiment. By selecting apanel for “Incidents & Requests,” as shown in FIG. 3, a user can view alist of open incidents, open requests, and incidents and requests closedwithin the last 30 days.

Referring to FIG. 8, a graphical user interface 100 for displayingoutages is shown according to an exemplary embodiment. In this exemplaryembodiment, the number of outages is shown since the installment of thesystem along with the duration of the outage. In some embodiments, theremay also be a description as to the cause of an outage.

Referring to FIG. 9, a graphical user interface 110 displaying one ormore product lines for a client company is shown according to anexemplary embodiment. The graphical user interface may displayinformation regarding development, testing, production, or training.This graphical user interface can give information to client companyabout the status of the system being hosted by the host entity.

An exemplary method for utilizing the community information is asfollows. A client company performs transactions and/or softwareoperations (e.g., actions) in an enterprise system hosted by a hostentity, such as in a cloud environment. The host entity stores metadata(e.g., response time, delay time processing time, usage) about thetransactions and/or software operations in a database for the clientcompany's actions and the actions of other client companies. The hostentity uses the stored metadata to present information to the clientcompany regarding the performance of the client company in comparison toone or more other client companies having metadata stored in thedatabase. The host entity may present a webpage to the client companythat shows the client company's performance based on the particularmetadata along with metadata for one or more other client company'susing the same or similar applications or performing the same or similartransactions and/or software operations.

The functionality described herein can be implemented by numerousmodules or components that can perform one or multiple functions. Eachmodule or component can be executed by a computer, such as a server,having a non-transitory computer-readable medium and processor. In onealternative, multiple computers may be necessary to implement thefunctionality of one module or component.

Unless specifically stated otherwise as apparent from the followingdiscussion, it is appreciated that throughout the description,discussions utilizing terms such as “processing” or “computing” or“calculating” or “determining” or “measuring” or “selecting” or“displaying” or “identifying” or “detecting” or the like, can refer tothe action and processes of a data processing system, or similarelectronic device, that manipulates and transforms data represented asphysical (electronic) quantities within the system's registers andmemories into other data similarly represented as physical quantitieswithin the system's memories or registers or other such informationstorage, transmission or display devices.

The exemplary embodiments can relate to an apparatus for performing oneor more of the functions described herein. This apparatus may bespecially constructed for the required purposes, or it may comprise ageneral purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by acomputer program stored in the computer. Such a computer program may bestored in a machine (e.g. computer) readable storage medium, such as,but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, opticaldisks, CD-ROMs and magnetic-optical disks, read only memories (ROMs),random access memories (RAMs) erasable programmable ROMs (EPROMs),electrically erasable programmable ROMs (EEPROMs), magnetic or opticalcards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronicinstructions, and each coupled to a bus.

The exemplary embodiments described herein are described as softwareexecuted on at least one server, though it is understood thatembodiments can be configured in other ways and retain functionality.The embodiments can be implemented on known devices such as a personalcomputer, a special purpose computer, cellular telephone, personaldigital assistant (“PDA”), a digital camera, a digital tablet, anelectronic gaming system, a programmed microprocessor or microcontrollerand peripheral integrated circuit element(s), and ASIC or otherintegrated circuit, a digital signal processor, a hard-wired electronicor logic circuit such as a discrete element circuit, a programmablelogic device such as a PLD, PLA, FPGA, PAL, or the like. In general, anydevice capable of implementing the processes described herein can beused to implement the systems and techniques according to thisinvention.

It is to be appreciated that the various components of the technologycan be located at distant portions of a distributed network and/or theInternet, or within a dedicated secure, unsecured and/or encryptedsystem. Thus, it should be appreciated that the components of the systemcan be combined into one or more devices or co-located on a particularnode of a distributed network, such as a telecommunications network. Aswill be appreciated from the description, and for reasons ofcomputational efficiency, the components of the system can be arrangedat any location within a distributed network without affecting theoperation of the system. Moreover, the components could be embedded in adedicated machine.

Furthermore, it should be appreciated that the various links connectingthe elements can be wired or wireless links, or any combination thereof,or any other known or later developed element(s) that is capable ofsupplying and/or communicating data to and from the connected elements.The term module as used herein can refer to any known or later developedhardware, software, firmware, or combination thereof that is capable ofperforming the functionality associated with that element. The termsdetermine, calculate and compute, and variations thereof, as used hereinare used interchangeably and include any type of methodology, process,mathematical operation or technique.

The embodiments described above are intended to be exemplary. Oneskilled in the art recognizes that there are numerous alternativecomponents and embodiments that may be substituted for or included inthe particular examples described herein and such additions orsubstitutions still fall within the scope of the invention.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method comprising:receiving, by a server over a communication network from a computer ofeach of a plurality of client companies, a first transmission comprisingmetadata of a plurality of software operations in enterprise resourceplanning systems being operated by the plurality of client companies,wherein each of the software operations is linked to a specific metadatapermitting the server to group data relating to each software operationto a specific category, the metadata comprising data representing aresponse time corresponding to a version of software operations run oneach of the plurality of client companies, the metadata furthercomprising a configuration of each computing system of each of theplurality of client companies; and presenting, by the server over thecommunication network to a computer of a selected client company of theplurality of client companies, a second transmission comprisingcomparative performance information regarding a plurality of thesoftware operations that display performance of the plurality of thesoftware operations based on metadata of the software operations inenterprise resource planning systems of other client companies that aresimilar to the enterprise resource planning system of the selectedclient company, wherein the comparative performance information takesinto consideration the configuration of each computing system of otherclient companies that are similar to the enterprise resource planningsystem of the selected client company, wherein the presenting includesdisplaying on a graphical user interface data representing response timecorresponding to each version and patch of the software operations ofdifferent enterprise resource planning systems of the plurality ofclient companies, a volume corresponding to each software version andpatch of the software operations of different enterprise resourceplanning systems of the plurality of client companies, running speedcorresponding to each software version and patch of the softwareoperations of different enterprise resource planning systems of theplurality of client companies, wherein the graphical user interfacecomprises a segment for each software operation, and within eachsegment, the graphical user interface comprises a listing of eachversion and patch, volume, and running speed, such that the softwareoperation of the enterprise resource planning system of the selectedclient company is shown relative to other computing systems of otherclient companies running the same software operation.
 2. The methodaccording to claim 1, wherein the performance information comprises asuccess rate.
 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein theperformance information comprises a processing time.
 4. The methodaccording to claim 1, wherein the metadata does not include personalidentifying information.
 5. The method according to claim 1, whereinreceiving metadata comprises receiving a transmission of metadatagenerated by an enterprise resource planning system server of eachclient company.
 6. The method according to claim 1, wherein presentingcomparative performance information further comprises comparing metadataof software operations of different versions of the same enterpriseresource planning system.
 7. The method according to claim 1, whereinpresenting comparative performance information is performed inreal-time.
 8. A system comprising: a processor; a communication serverthat receives a transmission comprising performance data of softwareoperations performed by an enterprise resource planning system server ofeach client company and transmit comparative information to a clientcompany communication server that displays on a client company computer,the transmission further comprising configurations of each computingsystem of each client company, wherein the comparative informationrepresents performance data of software operations of similar enterpriseresource planning systems of other client companies compared toperformance data of software operations of the client company'senterprise resource planning system, wherein the comparative informationtakes into consideration configuration of each computing system of theother client companies in view of configuration of each computing systemof the client company's enterprise resource planning system; and adashboard server that compares performance data of software operationsperformed by an enterprise resource planning system server of eachclient company and present the compared performance data to thecommunication server that transmits received compared performance datato a client company, wherein the dashboard server presents the comparedperformance data by displaying on a graphical user interface datarepresenting response time for each version and patch of the softwareoperations of different enterprise resource planning systems of eachclient company, a volume corresponding to each software version andpatch of the software operations of different enterprise resourceplanning systems of each client company, and a running speedcorresponding to each software version and patch of the softwareoperations of different enterprise resource planning systems of eachclient company, wherein the graphical user interface comprises a segmentfor each software operation, and within each segment, the graphical userinterface comprises a listing of each version and patch, volume, andrunning speed, such that the software operation of the enterpriseresource planning system of the client company is shown relative toother computing systems of the other client companies running the samesoftware operation.
 9. The system according to claim 8, furthercomprising an enterprise resource planning server coupled to thedashboard server and hosted on behalf of a client company.
 10. Thesystem according to claim 8, wherein the client company computerdisplays a webpage comprising the compared performance data provided bythe dashboard server.
 11. The system according to claim 8, furthercomprising a database coupled to the dashboard server and storesmetadata of software operations performed by the enterprise resourceplanning systems of the client companies.
 12. A computer-implementedmethod comprising: receiving, by a server, a first transmissioncomprising a first set of metadata from a first client companycorresponding to software operations in a first enterprise system,wherein each of the software operations is linked to a specific metadatapermitting the server to group data relating to each software operationto a specific category; receiving, by the server, a second transmissioncomprising a second set of metadata from a second client companycorresponding to software operations in a second enterprise system,wherein each of the software operations is linked to a specific metadatapermitting the server to group data relating to each software operationto a specific category; storing, by the server, the first set ofmetadata and the second set of metadata in a database; comparing, by theserver, the first set of metadata to the second set of metadata; andsending, by the server, a third transmission of the comparison ofperformance of the software operations on a display of a computingdevice of the first client company, wherein the comparison ofperformance of the software operations of the first and second clientcompany takes into consideration configuration of each computing systemof the first and second client company, wherein the comparison datadisplayed on a graphical user interface of the computing device of thefirst client company shows response time corresponding to each versionand patch of the software operations of different enterprise resourceplanning systems of a plurality of client companies including the firstand second client company, a volume corresponding to each softwareversion and patch of the software operations of different enterpriseresource planning systems of the plurality of client companies includingthe first and second client company, running speed corresponding to eachsoftware version and patch of the software operations of differententerprise resource planning systems of the plurality of clientcompanies including the first and second client company, wherein thegraphical user interface comprises a segment for each softwareoperation, and within each segment, the graphical user interfacecomprises a listing of each version and patch, volume, and runningspeed, such that the software operation of the first client company isshown relative to computing systems of the second client company runningthe same software operation.
 13. The method according to claim 12,wherein metadata is data selected from the group consisting of responsetime, delay time, processing time, and usage.
 14. The method accordingto claim 12, wherein the first enterprise system is the same as thesecond enterprise system.
 15. The method according to claim 12, whereinthe first enterprise system is a different version than the secondenterprise system.
 16. The method according to claim 12, wherein thecomparison is presented for display on a webpage.
 17. The methodaccording to claim 12, wherein the software operations of the firstclient company are similar to the software operations of the secondclient company.
 18. The method according to claim 12, wherein thecomparison represents a real-time comparison of metadata.
 19. The methodaccording to claim 1, wherein the graphical user interface furtherdisplays performance over time on a chart including the response time oftransactions, software operations, drills, and queries over time. 20.The system according to claim 8, wherein the graphical user interfacefurther displays performance over time on a chart including the responsetime of transactions, software operations, drills, and queries overtime.